Knowles, YAF, and Professional Provocation

If you didn’t get it before, perhaps you’ll get it now.

Michael Knowles is not a political philosopher or thinker. He does not share novel ideas worth anyone’s serious engagement. He is a propagandist whose sole job is to provoke the left.

That’s it – he exists to trigger the libs.

Or to make libs cry.

Or to troll the libs.

Whether or not he truly believes that “transgenderism” is a thing that should be “eradicated” is not especially relevant. So what if he does? So what if he doesn’t? It doesn’t matter – it took him in one week from a guy you never heard of to a local cause célèbre, strutting about the college towns of the western Great Lakes region telling 19 year-olds that women should stay home, barefoot and pregnant.

That’s what this is about – it is about the poisoning of the public discourse to make a buck. Michael Knowles didn’t come to UB for free. He’s on a YAF-sponsored speaking tour and his appearance fee is $5,000 – 10,000 per speech, plus travel expenses. From YAF’s national office’s website:

The second sentence is the giveaway – “despite the Left’s best efforts“. This tour is about getting the left on campus angry and out in droves. Knowles’ job is to provoke. YAF exists to provoke. There’s nothing here about how insightful and interesting his thoughts or speech are, is there? Just that they’re “in demand.”

While even banal grifters have free speech rights, let’s not kid ourselves about this being about the free exchange of ideas in a citadel of higher education. This is a traveling circus with a prime goal of pwning the libs and getting them to protest and look scary, with only a minor, tangential aim of preaching to a shrinking choir.

It is all designed to let depraved small-minded goons complain about students who hold wholly on-point signs cursing fascists, such as YAF and Knowles.

I do not use the term “fascist” lightly. Knowles has become prominent due to his declaration that the state of being transgender is non-existent and that society should not allow it. Knowles derives power and influence through denunciations of people different from him, whose experience he does not know, and essentially incites a pliant mob to join him in his hatred and derision. But his central thesis – that “transgenderism” is a novel phenomenon that requires “eradication” – the obvious parallels to Nazi rhetoric notwithstanding – is factually false. His defamation of transgender Americans is little more than a 21-st century Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

How would he react if someone called for the eradication from the public square of “conservatism?” Obviously, one cannot have conservatism without conservatives. It’s not really all that complicated, and his protestations are absurd.

But fascism is also about the wielding of authority and power in a way that oppresses those whom the regime hates – dissidents, LGBTQIA+ people, etc. Witness this exchange between a UB YAF female and a young man at a bulletin board. The young man was moving flyers around on the board because YAF supporters had deliberately covered up anti-Knowles flyers with Knowles event flyers. She launches into a belligerent diatribe against him and sticks her phone in his face, and he calmly explains what he’s doing and why. Her only retort is that her YAF flyers are “approved by [the Student’s Association] and his are not, and therefore his are not allowed on the bulletin board at all.

Do you get that? The “shall not be infringed” Constitutional absolutist crowd demands that speech applies only to them at all times, but to no one else unless officially sanctioned by SA. It is an absurd argument and he was right to be rude and flip the bird at her. Good for him and I hope he has a Venmo for a beer fund or something for standing up to this absurd person whining about her flyer.

Now look at this interaction.

That left wasn’t “angry.” She asked a direct question. In response, Knowles, who is not there to debate but to provoke, responded condescendingly and rudely to the student. He looks like an absolute shit, and the woman asking a question looks perfectly reasonable.

The right does not, in fact, demand free speech. That’s not what it’s about. They demand that you be exposed to their speech. This is why they whine incessantly about things like the “Twitter Files” and make up false allegations about artificially reduced conservative reach on social media. They think that the libs must be exposed to their fascist rants and incoherent ramblings and Catturd against their will. It is Elon Musk’s reason for being right now, and it is why Twitter is dead. Musk rehabilitated the Keks and the Pepes and the rest of the Nazis because “free speech absolutism” demands that libs be told that Jews are the devil and Black people should be enslaved.

As for YAF, I first became aware of them in the mid-1980s when I attended Boston University. The student body held a walkout from class to protest a University award of an honorary degree to a South African whom many deemed to be a Botha regime collaborationist, and to demand that the University divest its holdings connected to apartheid South Africa. YAF were there, taunting the students walking out of class to protest systemic racial segregation. Not a great look, but the look isn’t the point. We were the crazy pro-Mandela leftist students and it was all about provocation to get an angry response so they could say, regard the intolerant left, who cannot countenance some good-natured ribbing about their earnest opposition to apartheid.

Michael Knowles is a professional provocateur, and YAF is an astroturf group run out of Reston, Virginia. Founded in 1960, I see nothing in its constituent document about eradicating gay people or transgender people or pwnage of libs.

This is what conservatism has devolved into – not any sort of ideology or platform. It has morphed from a Reagan personality cult into a Trump personality cult and it demands that you move aside so that they can achieve cultural and political hegemony without actually earning it through persuasion or votes.

So, I do not for a moment want anyone to think that I disagree with the protests against Knowles and YAF and their hateful, bigoted provocation. I personally think that mockery is best. But provocateurs like Knowles and Yiannopoulos revel in the biggest and most confrontational crowds. That is the real win for them – the speech is an afterthought.

And it will forever be thus – while transgender Americans are desirous of a world where they can live their lives with dignity and without discrimination, there will be a population of morally depraved self-righteous professional provocateurs to make their lives a living hell over bathroom stalls.

People who make a habit out of lib-pwnership will call transgender people “pedophiles” and “groomers” because those are the slurs that helped to keep homosexuals oppressed for generations before.

I think trans people have always existed, do exist, and will continue to exist, no matter what some washed-up failed actor says. I think it is hate speech for someone to deny their reality and humanity and to call for their “eradication.” The failed actor doesn’t need to believe in transgender people or transgenderism – they exist regardless of his “belief.” The question is whether the failed actor would gladly direct the power of the state to outlaw them, oppress them, segregate them, or otherwise to terrorize them. In an interview with WBFO Thursday, attorney Heidi Jones identified this phenomenon as “stochastic terrorism.” It’s what “Libs of Tik Tok” Chaya Raichik is expert in.

The professional provocateur, to the extent he has any beliefs at all, would indeed use the power of the state to oppress and “eradicate” transgender people. And he would do it for pretty cheap money. And a small handful of Gen-Zers attending a public university are jumping up and down with glee over the oppression of peers who never bothered them even once.

Farewell to Bob

So, Bob McCarthy – a longtime target of my ire and occasional appreciation – is leaving the Buffalo News. I can’t say I am sad about it because I thought that he was too often little more than a willing stenographer of politicians’ petty accusations and prevarications. He relied too much on sources who were obvious (Illuzzi, Pigeon, Lorigo) if not completely disgraced. But what I really disliked was McCarthy’s relentless focus on the horserace aspect of politics – who had more cash on hand, who was ahead in polls. He seldom called out politicians who broke campaign finance laws or tried to promote push polls. Illuzzi’s death definitely dealt a blow to his reporting but the last nail in the coffin was Pigeon’s long-coming descent into criminality and disgrace.

There does not exist even one thing I have ever written about, or one story I “broke” in all of my time doing this, that shouldn’t first have been covered by the Buffalo News’ political reporter and commentator.

I started blogging in 2003, and a lot of changes have happened, but a lot remains the same – so many of our acute and chronic problems in WNY come down to bad, lazy, corrupt leadership. It’s like we live in this corner of the country that is somehow insulated from everyone else and immune to good ideas. Sure, there are some exceptions but just look at Byron Brown clinging to office for 16 years and his city unable to handle a gentle snowstorm, never mind a blizzard. Buffalo is too good of a place to deserve that sort of “leadership.” Buffalonians are too good of a group of people to deserve the sort of sleepy one-step-forward-two-steps-back political leadership they too often get.

Just the other day I was thinking about Canalside and Bass Pro. That was a lifetime ago – it is an issue that dates back 15 – 20 years and as it stands now the only retail that exists within the Canalside area is two museum giftshops. There isn’t so much as a permanent toilet.

Artvoice is gone. The Public is gone. Alt-weeklies are basically dead. Print is dead. Investigative Post does good work most of the time, but we deserve more than that.

So, I wish Bob good luck and Godspeed in his retirement, secure in the knowledge that the new owners of the Buffalo News – an entity that had 15 years to adapt to the death of print and the rise of digital – will undoubtedly not replace him and instead rely on wire services and contractors to do the work. The politicians – the elites who relied upon McCarthy to give their bullshit a boost – will only benefit from the diminished threat of scrutiny, to everyone’s detriment.

How To Talk Radio

Joe Beamer is a young man who wields a degree of political power in Buffalo that is disproportionate to his knowledge and ability. Last Thursday, he allowed our public airwaves to be polluted by disgusting and abhorrent pro-Putinist propaganda, and he let it on without contemporaneous challenge or cross-examination. It was a monologue of disinformation.

Beamer did critique it some minutes later, but that is why the phrase “too little, too late” exists in that syntax.

Let’s be honest: WBEN ceased to be “news” radio a long time ago. It is now an empty shell that barely competes with your Spotify playlist or favorite podcast. WBEN used to be the local home of Rush Limbaugh. Remember him? He was the biggest thing on right-wing talk radio from 1988 until his death, yet he is remembered for nothing. All that hate and bile brought him riches and an empty void of a legacy.

Now, talk radio is made up of Limbaugh clones, none of whom have the smarts or talent to do what he did. It’s all the same dumb tropes and talking points that you now get on Facebook. Calling women “femi-nazis” only gets you so far, especially when you have real-life contemporary nazis threatening the western liberal small-d democratic order.

I don’t listen to WBEN. I don’t need some stranger telling me what to think about things. I don’t need “Charlene from Lancaster” giving her deranged opinion about Vladimir Putin any more than I need “Rambo Jim’s” take on anything. I can make up my own mind by consuming the news from various sources. I don’t watch cable news talk for the same reasons. It is boring.

Last week, however, “Charlene” called up WBEN during Beamer’s time hosting and spewed a vicious, untrue stream of pro-Putin propaganda, which she likely picked up on local Q-Anon bulletin boards or Facebook. To call it unhinged would be a gross understatement. It was sheer insanity, delivered with a self-assured ignorance that is the hallmark of contemporary talk radio and Facebook political discourse. Putin is getting the job done in Ukraine, she said.

Why is it that so many people in western New York in particular are so deeply and shamelessly radicalized on the right? The common denominator is WBEN. Caputo, DiPietro, Mychajliw, Paladino, Aldinger, Dinero, Thompson, the risible “Financial Guys” – just to name a few – all of them share a nexus with WBEN. It is where right-wing ideology goes to grow an audience, to spread propaganda, and to seek legitimacy. I mean, the radio wouldn’t let lies on the air, would it?!

It starts with Grand Island tolls, morphs during the Obama years into the “tea party”, Bauerle declares that Obama is worse than al Qaeda. They go through the Koch-funded “Americans for Prosperity,” then Trumpism, the alt-right, “Groypers“, and anti-mask/anti-vaxxers. It is a straight line that has done so much and worked so lazily to poison our society and political discourse. It has helped to transform the conservative movement writ-large, and the Republican Party, into a local branch of United Russia.

They want to be ruled by an anti-woke dictator. They like Putin because Putin is anti-woke. Putin does not think “black lives matter.” Putin doesn’t “say gay”. Putin hates trans people and gays and lesbians and queer people, too. Like they, Putin has no real use for (((George Soros))) or the (((globalists))). Putin only cancels the libs who dissent from his party line. They like that Putin literally eliminates opponents when he doesn’t put on a show trial and sends them to Siberia. Trump and Putin got along. Trump wishes he could do to critics what Putin does.

This is why Q-addled right-wing talk radio callers praise war crimes and call their victims Nazis – because Putin is right, in two senses of that word. But if you’re a young talk radio host bringing up Ukraine as a topic, you should have enough of a grasp of the subject to cross-examine callers. It’s supposed to be a dialogue, not a soliloquy.

Non-sports talk radio is the gateway to right-wing authoritarianism, and this has been a gradual process over the course of the last 50 years. “Charlene” is a symptom. WBEN is the opiate.

Bob McCarthy Doing Mychajliw PR

The Republicans are fighting about which of their Sheriff candidates is MAGAier. Here comes Stefan Mychajliw to offer his ethical and fiscal clarity, such as it is.

Oh, and here comes Bob McCarthy to simply transcribe and publish whatever Mychajliw tells him, without checking it first.

On one side we have Somethingorother Garcia, who switched parties a few times and voted in the Democratic primary in 2016. So not MAGA!

On the other side we have Somethingorother Healy-Case who also switched parties even more times, but did not vote in the Democratic primary in 2016. OMG MAGA!

Who cares.

Anyhow, Mychajliw, gearing up to lose a town supervisor’s race in a landslide, sweatily called Bob McCarthy to tell him:

In a routine review of county expenses, Comptroller Stefan I. Mychajliw Jr. said he is scrutinizing payments of $282,037 since 2015 to 716 Security and Investigations, partly owned by Garcia.

Bob McCarthy

Mychajliw has spent much of his recent tenure as “Comptroller” no-showing and launching little culture war catfights. There exists no place on earth and no person with a brain who suddenly believes that Mychajliw – who doesn’t know how to do the job from which he has absented himself – undertook a “routine” review of county contracts with a current candidate for office. It insults everyone’s intelligence and quite obviously so. But what McCarthy wrote next is simply amazing:

Mychajliw, also a Republican, emphasized that he has taken no position in the hotly contested primary race featuring Garcia and Karen L. Healy-Case, the endorsed party candidate.

Bob McCarthy

Now, this is a lie. To clarify: I have no doubt that Mychajliw opened his gob and told Bob McCarthy this lie. What is doubly egregious, however, is that McCarthy and the Buffalo News did not see fit to double-check Mychajliw’s assertion that he had “taken no position” in the Sheriff’s primary race between Garcia and Healy-Case.

Had McCarthy or his editor undertaken a simple check of the state election website, he would have discovered the $100 donation Mychajliw made to Healy-Case in late March 2021.

Mychajliw can support whomever he wants, but it is an abuse of his power to use his state-sanctioned office to target political opponents for special scrutiny or persecution. It is just as much an abuse of power as Trump pulling reporters’ phone logs or Mychajliw using the Comptroller’s office to issue what amounts to a campaign press release. I guarantee you that the Erie County Comptroller has no say or authority over what the state does with its state and federal funding for the Skyway.

Mychajliw also noted that the payments pose “numerous issues and concerns” for Garcia, especially should he win election as sheriff and profit through the county.

“There could be a serious conflict if he is potentially sheriff and privately benefits from a job his office can handle to begin with,” he said.

Bob McCarthy

So, Mychajliw is not accusing anyone of malfeasance, but merely suggesting that there is a potential conflict of interest. “Could be” and “potentially” are the weasel-word clues. Garcia responded he would sever his relationship with that company if he should win, so what is the problem?

The problem is that Stefan Mychajliw used his public office to do the Healy-Case campaign’s bidding and generate some mailer copy for it.

It is time for this shamefully opportunistic serial candidate to be retired to the dreaded private sector.

Patrick Kane Wins Again

rapeculture

Just a few convenient days after his election as Supreme Court Justice, outgoing DIstrict Attorney Frank Sedita issued an unusual statement explaining that his office was not going to prosecute Patrick Kane for allegedly raping a young woman in August. The case has been plagued from the very beginning by strategic leaks of information seemingly from people with something to promote or defend. The vast majority of these leaks seemed to assail the alleged victim, accusing her of being a liar or a gold-digger or that there was a lack of forensic evidence to corroborate the allegation. The best that the alleged victim’s friends could do was leak to the News that she’s a really good person.

To recap: the first article I published explained why club owner Mark Croce engaged in blatant slut-shaming to the Buffalo News. I followed that up with a Kane case FAQ, and a further analysis of the victim blaming that was taking place in the press from literally the moment this news hit. Kane had an off-duty cop on his payroll, and he also told the News tales about the alleged victim and Kane supporters took that all at face value. Paul Cambria argued with me about the case on Facebook, and that made a bit of news, the leak about a lack of DNA evidence happened, and then the alleged victim’s mother attempted to perpetrate a fraud on her daughter’s lawyer, the public, and the system with an evidence bag. District Attorney Sedita held a dramatic press conference where he quite clearly expressed his personal prejudices about the case, indicating that a prosecution was going to be unlikely and explaining that he had exchanged exculpatory Brady material with the popular and wealthy alleged perpetrator’s legal team during the investigatory stage – something unprecedented, according to criminal lawyers with whom I spoke.

Over the course of this past week, we learned that the alleged victim was no longer going to cooperate with this District Attorney’s office, citing the “stress” of this investigation, and the case was ended two days after election day.

Here are some points to consider:

1. Kane isn’t “innocent”: Nothing’s Changed

He’s not even “not guilty”. Despite Mr. Sedita going miles out of his way to cast aspersions on the alleged victim and protecting the alleged perpetrator, no one knows what, if anything, happened between Kane and the alleged victim that night in August. One thing is for sure, because the alleged victim won’t cooperate, we’re unlikely to find out in a court of law what happened. I heard several male commentators take to the air over the last few days, including half of “Cellino & Barnes”, explaining that even a civil lawsuit was unlikely.

There was no trial—no jury, no nothing—to determine Kane’s guilt of lack of guilt. I haven’t seen anywhere that the alleged victim had recanted.

Sedita’s statement about what he characterized as, “this so-called ‘case’” added that it was, “rife with reasonable doubt.” But that’s not the standard at this stage – the D.A. was assembling evidence to present to a grand jury, which would be tasked with determining whether there exists probable cause that a crime occurred. Reasonable doubt is a job not even for the grand jury, but the trial jury. Sedita seems to have skipped all of those steps for one of two reasons; 1. he doesn’t believe the alleged victim and doesn’t want to trouble Kane with this anymore; and/or, 2. His office is notorious for being selective about prosecuting high-profile cases only where there exists a strong likelihood of success.

As a disinterested observer of this entire case, my impression was that the D.A.’s office was more interested in protecting the alleged perpetrator than the alleged victim; more worried about the hockey star’s reputation than whether something wrong may have happened one August night. I’m not saying that’s what happened—only that it is the impression that they left. 

2. Sedita’s Statement Raises More Questions than it Answers

I can’t recall another case of any sort where the D.A. so openly vocalized his sympathy with an accused, where law enforcement bent so far over backwards for an accused. Well, at least not since Antoine Garner allegedly murdered then stuffed Amanda Wienckowski in a garbage tote. Sedita told us that the, “physical and forensic evidence … tend to contradict the complainant’s claims.” Well, why have trials if we can just ask the District Attorney to find facts and assess credibility for us? You can see the entire statement and the News‘ reporting here. It sounds like a report of a trial that never took place; that took place only within the District Attorney’s office. The details that Sedita revealed raised more questions than they answered.

“The physical evidence and the forensic evidence, when viewed in tandem, tend to contradict the complainant’s claim that she was raped on Kane’s bed,” Sedita’s statement said.

Could she have been wrong? Whatever happened—could it have taken place in someone else’s bed? Room? On a couch? This was her first time in Kane’s house.

Sedita wrote that Kane “exercised his constitutional right to remain silent.” Sedita also wrote that Kane made “no known incriminating statements to any civilian.” Sedita also said Kane didn’t engage in “any conduct consistent with a consciousness of guilt.”

He was represented and advised by a competent and experienced criminal lawyer who, according to a radio interview this week, specifically advised him to conduct himself normally.

The DNA results “lend no corroboration whatsoever to the complainant’s claim of penetration.”

Perhaps there was no completion. Perhaps there was a condom. Perhaps it was a lesser included offense.  “Kane’s DNA was found under her fingernails and on her shoulders where there were bite marks.”

All of these factual inconsistencies exist in any case—large or small—and that’s why we have prosecutions and trials and arrests and presentments to grand juries.

3. A Big Win for Rape Culture

We’re already seeing articles explaining how Patrick Kane can rebuild his prior reputation of being a stumbling drunk who punches out cab drivers over pennies in change. Not satisfied with an end to the prosecution, Cambria made sure to mock the young accuser, “[s]tress and strain? Every week, my office would get pictures sent to us of this young woman at parties and social occasions, living it up…I do not believe she was suffering stress and strain.” Did Cambria produce these pictures to the News? Did the News follow up on that? Then why print it? Cambria is being paid to represent a client, he makes a statement accusing a young woman of having a social life, and the News prints it, verbatim, without even checking to see if it’s true. James Brown was right: This is a man’s world.

As all the Kane fans take to social media and condemn Kane’s accuser for being a gold-digging whore who should be sued—or worse—I have no doubt that something happened on August 2nd at Kane’s house that deeply troubled the alleged victim to the point where she accused Kane of rape. It might not have risen to the level of rape—she’s not a lawyer—but there exists absolutely no evidence that she was just out for a big payday, or that she concocted this entire story out of whole cloth as part of a grand scheme to extort money. The young college graduate and former cheerleader probably doesn’t need the grief that’s ensued.

Kane wins, and gets to carry on with his life, at least until the next drunken escapade or assault. The criminal justice system is the real victim here—it’s exceedingly difficult to prove and prosecute rape cases, and this entire freakshow hasn’t made it any easier. It hasn’t given women any assurance that they’ll be treated with respect or fairness if they accuse a powerful and influential man of an assault. It certainly didn’t do any favors for the victims of rape and sexual assault, or the people who make their lives helping them. It hasn’t done a stitch of good in terms of battling back against the rape culture pervasive not just in the fraternity of sports, but in our society overall.

Powerful males in law, law enforcement, Buffalo’s bar scene, and media pulled out all the stops to protect Kane and make the accuser’s life a living hell. The odds were stacked against her from the moment she called the cops in August. The leaks to the media—almost all of which were antagonistic to the accuser—were well-coordinated and devastating. The reaction on social media that I’ve seen is troubling. Quite honestly, from what I can tell, the truth and justice never had a chance.

Patrick Kane Case: The Morning After

cambria

The dust is still settling from a shocking, raucous week for the Patrick Kane rape case. Let’s consider what’s left of it.

Last Sunday, the Buffalo News published information obtained through anonyms about the results of DNA testing done on the alleged victim. It was reportedly negative for Patrick Kane’s DNA, at least below the waist. This information is exculpatory for Kane, but not definitively so.

By Wednesday, the alleged victim’s attorney, Thomas Eoannou, held a blockbuster press conference to accuse someone of tampering with evidence, having left what Eoannou called the “rape kit bag” on the mother’s doorstep. But within minutes, all the relevant law enforcement agencies had denied that there was any irregularity in the chain of evidentiary custody. Something fishy was going on. Thursday morning, I wrote this:

Eoannou’s bag almost certainly at one point contained some piece of evidence that was obtained at ECMC on the morning the rape kit was administered. It’s feasible, for instance, that an item was stored in there but the police took it away in a different bag. What’s clear is that everyone with no stake in the outcome of the underlying rape case agrees that the rape kit hasn’t been tampered with.

By Thursday night, Eoannou had fired the complainant and her mother as his clients, and held an extraordinary press conference recanting practically everything he had said the day before. An embarrasing spectacle had been exponentially grown into a circus. Anyone’s best guess is that the mother concocted the hoax in an effort to cast doubt on the forensic evidence – an effort that would have been substantively pointless. After all, its exculpatory effect helps Kane’s defense, but so would any manufactured, phony doubt cast upon the reliability of that DNA data; the result is the same.

On Friday, District Attorney Frank Sedita held his own press conference. Clearly, Sedita was incensed by the complainant’s former legal advisor, Thomas Eoannou’s accusations about a brown paper bag; accusations that were quickly determined to be false. For a shocking period of just over 24 hours, Erie County’s law enforcement agencies were falsely made to look like bumbling incompetents. Sedita was there to set the record straight.

The press conference had all the hallmarks of a closing argument to a jury. There was a concise and persuasive PowerPoint presentation to go along with Sedita’s dramatic and emotional statements. I think that the press conference itself went on for about 30 minutes longer than necessary, and that perhaps Sedita took too many liberties in discussing the case during his Q and A. The DA now discloses exculpatory Brady material to the parties during the investigation stage – before criminal action is commenced? Sedita needed to disclose that the complainant had retained civil legal counsel? He needed to emphasize that it wasn’t a question of “when”  but “if” the case is presented to a grand jury? Too long, and too much information.

Nevertheless, it quickly became clear that Sedita’s office has acted with utmost professionalism, and has not contributed in any palpable way to the unfortunate circus atmosphere surrounding the underlying case. They have behaved ethically and responsibly. Also, his office now finds itself chasing an extra, unnecessary inquiry: what did the complaining victim know about her mother’s brown paper bag hoax, and when did she know it?

What did we learn from D.A. Sedita? There was never a bag for the rape kit; the rape kit is sealed in a box, and taken to an evidence locker at central police services. He explained that the Eoannou’s brown paper bag was given to the alleged victim’s mother by a nurse at ECMC to hold an article of clothing that the complainant was wearing at the time of the supposed attack. The mother never used the bag; police took the clothing and placed it in their own evidence bag, and the mom held onto the hospital’s bag and took it home.

“What do we do with this new information?” Sedita said at the news conference. “Obviously, there’s been an effort to create a hoax. Obviously, there’s been an effort to manufacture a perception that forensic evidence cannot be trusted. I’ve got to figure out who was in on that, why they would do that and what it means for all of the other evidence. I will be doing that. We will be doing that over the course of the next few days.”

While I’ve argued that there exists no evidence at this stage to conclude that the alleged victim had any inkling of what mom was up to, others have pointed out that this is naive and stretches credulity. I prefer sworn testimony to anonymous allegations or declarations to the press, and I prefer proof to speculative conclusions. I take every media report about the case with a grain of salt. If the alleged victim is discovered to be incredible or a liar, how this case has been handled would likely dissuade future victims of sexual assult from coming forward. If you’ve seen on social media some of the visceral, homicidal hatred being slung the complainant’s way, you’d be appalled. Chicago reporter Julie DiCaro, who has reported fairly on this matter, couldn’t go to work on Friday thanks to death threats. Because hockey; because bro/rape culture.

After Sedita’s press conference, Patrick Kane’s lawyer, Paul Cambria, invited the media over to chat. He reiterated his belief that the bag hoax establishes conclusively that the entire thing is a fabrication, and there should not be any prosecution. Specifically,

That the actual accuser knew what that bag contained. That was a very, very important fact. If you know what it contains, you witness someone claiming that it contains something else and you know it’s introduced into the legal process and you know what the consequences can be. You’re ok with that, you’re ok with a fraud being perpetrated. I think that’s a very significant fact.

He argued that the mother could be subpoenaed to testify, in which case the hoax becomes fodder for cross-examination on the issue of credibility. Cambria said that she could have committed the crime of obstruction of governmental administration, and stated that Kane was the real victim. Cambria correctly stated that Eoannou could have saved himself a ton of embarrassment by simply going to the authorities with his concerns about the brown paper bag, rather than the media.

Tom Bauerle spent two afternoons on WBEN parroting Cambria. After his presser, Cambria was caught on a hot mic saying, “Tom [Eoannou] is a good lawyer, I can’t believe he got sucked into this.” True, that.

I have no idea whether there will be any prosecution, at this point. It depends a great deal on how law enforcement assess the credibility of the complaining victim. If she knew or acquiesced in her mother’s hoax with the bag from ECMC, this case is finished. Cambria argues that she had to know, but look again at Sedita’s statement – the mother never used the bag, so the “actual accuser” feasibly wouldn’t know what, if anything, it “contained”. In any event, no one knows whether the alleged victim is culpable for the hoax any more than I know the opposite to be true; if you say she’s a cheat or a liar, you bear the burden of proof on that point.

If there is no case to be had, I will wait for the District Attorney to tell me that. Before that happens, I’m assuming that everyone involved is a rational, thinking person who would not behave completely unreasonably. So far, the complainant’s mother has proven herself to be neither rational nor thinking. As for the complainant herself, I want her guilt regarding the bag hoax – to the extent it exists – to be proven. Don’t let’s jump to conclusions about her, just like we shouldn’t jump to conclusions about Kane himself.

Anyone notice how many people directly involved or commenting publicly about this whole thing are male? Oh, it’s a tough case for the prosecution now, says former Attorney General Dennis Vacco. The alleged victim had to know what mom was up to, says Kane’s attorney, Paul Cambria. The mom perpetrated a fraud so embarrassing, Eoannou held a press conference to destroy her forever, and fire her daughter as his client. Hell, here I am asking people to stop leaking information and rushing to conclusions – and I get grief about it. The few females I’ve seen actively pursuing this case are the aforementioned Julie DiCaro, whose life was threatened for daring to report objectively, occasionally, we hear from representatives from crisis services, and local attorney Florina Altshiler, who also seems to be the only person in any piece in which she’s quoted to basically urge caution and rationality from people. We need a lot more female lawyers and commentators involved with this case.

This case has been polluted by victim-shaming since day one. I think we could all benefit from hearing more women’s voices discussing this case in the mainstream media. We’re already giving Kane the benefit of the doubt by acknowledging that he remains not only not guilty of anything, but not even charged. We sit here instead contemplating what legal recourse Kane might have if absolved of wrongdoing.

Now, we wait some more, so that law enforcement can investigate an ancillary issue about a brown paper bag that never should have happened. No, this is not how these things typically go. 

Patrick Kane Case: Eoannou Quits

eoannouquits

Thursday night, in a hastily called, unusually late-night press conference, attorney Thomas Eoannou publicly withdrew as attorney for the complaining victim in the Patrick Kane rape case. Eoannou’s move came just a day after he held a different press conference, where a brown paper bag with a hospital label on it took center stage, as Eoannou alleged that it was evidence of some sort of epic evidence tampering.

As it turns out, and as we reported on Thursday morning, the bag represented nothing at all. Eoannou was duped, overreacted, or both. To hear him tell it, his investigation into how that bag came into his possession led him to believe that the alleged victim’s mother’s story about it was false. Because he had so publicly used that bag to accuse someone unnamed of sabotaging this case and tampering with its evidence, Eoannou looked ridiculous coming before the media a second time doing his best Emily Litella impression: never mind.

Except here, Eoannou’s client’s mother’s misinformation was such that he felt he could no longer represent them, and he fired them. Eoannou made it crystal clear that he didn’t blame the alleged victim herself, and that she had nothing to do with this.

What do we know? 

To circle back to the underlying rape investigation, these things are true:

1. Eoannou’s bag had nothing to do with the rape kit and is not evidence of tampering;

2. The alleged victim did not lie or make up some story to Eoannou about the bag – her mother evidently did;

3. None of this means that Patrick Kane did – or didn’t – rape the alleged victim;

4. The actual evidence remains safely tucked away at Central Police Services, unmolested and untainted, and from a prosecutorial standpoint, nothing is different as we wake up on Friday morning; and

5. Thomas Eoannou – who was, is, and remains one of the area’s elite criminal defense attorneys – had no official role in this case. For the underlying rape case, his withdrawal substantively represents absolutely nothing.

After all, the prosecution may not need the mother’s testimony to present and try this case, and without her, this whole episode with the bag never gets in front of a jury; it’s totally irrelevant. Arguably, were mom to testify, it could be brought up to assail her credibility, but that’s it. It can’t be used to challenge the credibility of the alleged victim herself.

Cambria’s Bluster

It also bears mentioning that Paul Cambria is wrong – none of this establishes that the underlying rape allegation is a “fabrication”, and he’s blustering for his client. Cambria’s posturing is unseemly, and the leaks to the media about the results of the DNA tests likely came from someone in or close to Kane’s defense team and need to stop. Those leaks are poisoning the jury pool and thwarting justice. Unfortunately, we have Eoannou to blame, since his very public accusations regarding that evidence bag opened the door for Cambria to speak publicly, as well. All of this was horribly thought-out, and has exploded in the complainant’s team’s face.

If the complaining victim’s mother lied to Tom Eoannou; if a tangential witness lied to her own lawyer, who has no official role in the prosecution, how exactly does this reflect poorly on the complaining victim herself? It doesn’t. It’s just a sideshow. It’s a shitshow, to be sure, but full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. The prosecution – if it comes – will be brought by the District Attorney’s office. Eoannou’s only role was to help the accuser’s family navigate a complicated and nerve-wracking system for victims whose interests are not always directly protected by prosecutors.

At this point, the alleged victim’s mother may have bought herself a prosecution of her own.

Fraud and Eoannou’s Withdrawal

Whether a prosecution comes is up to the District Attorney’s office. Will this behavior by one ancillary witness cause a notoriously cautious office to beg off? In a statement to the press last night, the accuser’s family says that she has, “every intention of pursuing this case to a just conclusion.”

One troubling aspect of all of this is this: although Eoannou may have felt an ethical obligation to withdraw from this representation based on the alleged victim’s mother’s behavior, he had no duty to do it so publicly. Ethical Rule 1.16 is instructive on this matter: if Eoannou felt a duty to so quickly and publicly withdraw, he suspected the mother was committing some sort of fraud.

It bears repeating that ejaculation is not an element of the crime of rape, and the absence of Kane’s DNA alone should not – and does not – absolve him of rape in this case. Likewise, the reported presence of another person’s DNA does not absolve Kane of rape. If I were to speculate, I suspect that the alleged victim’s mom likely concocted the “I found a ripped-up bag” thing because she’s legally unsophisticated and thought she could manufacture some sort of doubt about the DNA evidence. When Eoannou found out the truth, he had to quit (a) because she tried to commit a fraud; and (b) he helped promote it; and (c) he came out looking stupid when it turned out to be false.

However, a lawyer can only withdraw if he can do so “without material adverse effect on the interests of the client”. Query whether the way in which he announced his withdrawal met that requirement. I don’t think it did, and I think the myriad Tweets I’m seeing demanding that the alleged victim – who even Eoannou says is innocent of this aborted fraud – be prosecuted for extortion, underscores my conclusion.

Transfer Venue

One thing is certain, in my mind: the venue for this case must be changed. Send it to Jefferson or Broome County and get it away from the Buffalo media market in order to find New Yorkers who don’t care about Patrick Kane to analyze and find the facts in this case. I don’t think that Kane – or the prosection – can get a fair trial in Erie County, and the whole thing should be moved pursuant to 230.2 of the Criminal Procedure Law. Under NY law, both sides can request transfer of venue.

Everyone Dummy Up

It is my hope that this matter goes before a grand jury sooner rather than later, and that somebody goes before a judge and asks for a gag order on all counsel and witnesses. All of this underscores what I’ve been saying since the day Mark Croce decided to tell the Buffalo News about what a classy joint he runs and how these girls were hanging all over Kanereveryone should stop talking to the media.

Patrick Kane and the Evidence Bag

eoannou

I’ve been writing pretty regularly about the need for everyone involved with the Patrick Kane rape investigation—lawyers, cops, witnesses, and parties—to be quiet and stop feeding the media. If the underlying desire—regardless of whether you side with Kane’s alleged victim, or with Kane—is to find justice, you won’t find it by trying the case in the press.

On that front, Wednesday September 24, 2015 was an absolute legal shitshow.

In fact, the whole week has been pretty horrible; remember Monday’s stories about what sort of DNA was found in the rape kit? There’s no reason for the general public to know that, at this point in the investigation. But Wednesday was something different; something special.

If you haven’t already heard, Thomas Eoannou, the criminal defense attorney advising Kane’s alleged victim, held an extraordinary press conference. Eoannou alleged that someone had deposited a brown paper bag at the home of the complaining victim’s mother. He went on to claim that the bag was absolutely, positively the one that once contained the rape kit administered in August at ECMC. The bag was ripped open and empty, and on it was a hospital label with the victim’s personal details and other information. Here it is in its entirety:

Pretty dramatic stuff, and if accurate—that someone had tampered with physical evidence of an alleged crime—beyond alarming. Never before had I heard of such an egregious mishandling of physical evidence of a crime, at least in an advanced first-world democracy. While Eoannou thanked the “good samaritan” who dropped the bag off, tipping the alleged victim’s family off to this break in the chain of custody, my initial reaction was that this was some sort of intimidation.

But not so fast.

Hamburg Police had this to say about it:

So, Hamburg’s chain of custody is in order. What about Erie County, whose Central Police Services (CPS) handles and stores this sort of evidence?

So, the county can also vouch for the state of the evidence, and that it is all present and accounted for.

So what is Eoannou talking about, and what was in that bag?

Shortly after Eoannou was done talking, all the press rushed down Delaware to the office of Patrick Kane’s lawyer, Paul Cambria. There Cambria, who had not previously commented about the case, except on my personal Facebook page, sang like a canary. Patrick Kane is the real victim. Kane’s DNA was not found “below” the alleged victim’s “waist”, but others’ DNA was. Because the findings from the rape kit were helpful to Kane, his side had no motive to tamper with any evidence. Only someone unhappy with the results of the rape kit would do such a thing.

People on Twitter commented on the “money soap” and Hustler 40th Anniversary mug on the bookshelf in Cambria’s office. Paul’s Hustler Mug is on Twitter.

The spectacle grew more surreal with each passing moment.

Here is a close-up of the redacted sticker on the bag Eoannou revealed:

That’s a regular grocery bag with a hospital sticker on it. Could Eoannou be incorrect? If Hamburg and Erie County confirm that all evidence and containers are present and accounted for—secure and unmolested—was this a mistake? Was it some PR stunt designed as a response to the persistent and constant pro-Kane leaks to the Buffalo News and other media outlets?  The pro-Kane PR juggernaut has been effective and well-funded up until now—not so much for the alleged victim. She is unknown and her side has been silent, until now. The information reported by some outlets had to come from either law enforcement or Kane’s legal team.

Also, let’s parse Cambria: no Kane DNA below the waist. But what about bitemarks on shoulder? Other DNA, above the waist? What about under victim’s nails? He limited his statement very strategically. The leaks about the absence of Kane’s DNA was especially harmful because for some reason people think that you need ejaculate for there to have been a rape. You don’t.

Eoannou’s bag almost certainly at one point contained some piece of evidence that was obtained at ECMC on the morning the rape kit was administered. It’s feasible, for instance, that an item was stored in there but the police took it away in a different bag. What’s clear is that everyone with no stake in the outcome of the underlying rape case agrees that the rape kit hasn’t been tampered with.

It’s also quite clear that the delivery of that bag to the victim’s mother’s house means something. What? No one knows. No one is likely to know unless the person who dropped it off comes forward. Was it to be helpful? Intimidating?

In the end, we learned that Buffalo lawyers and media are a bit clumsy when it comes to dealing with a super-high-profile criminal investigation. Hamburg and the county were quick to react to Eoannou’s charges, and it quickly turned the matter from one type of WTF into a wholly different and distinct type of WTF.

A lot of rumors flew around today, too. No one knows what’s true and what’s not. But one thing became crystal clear on a warm Wednesday afternoon in Buffalo: that the people involved in the Patrick Kane rape investigation really, really need to stop talking to the media. All of them—Cambria, Eoannou, law enforcement—everyone. We don’t need odd press events about brown paper bags any more than we need bar owners engaging in some good old-fashioned victim-shaming.

Justice is not being served by transforming a spectacle into a circus.

Patrick Kane and DNA

kaneQ

It’s been quiet lately on the Patrick Kane rape investigation front. Here’s what happened in August:

Why Mark Croce went to the Buffalo News: August 9, 2015

Slut-Shaming and the Patrick Kane Case: August 12, 2015

The Patrick Kane Case FAQ: August 13, 2015

Patrick Kane’s Designated Driver Opens Yap: August 17, 2015

Paul Cambria on Patrick Kane: Don’t Prejudge: August 18, 2015

After the initial round of victim-shaming and leakage to the media, the meme over the past few weeks has been “will they or won’t they”? Specifically, will Kane and the victim reach some sort of private, civil accommodation (read: payment) in order to avoid a prosecution?

Although a civil settlement would likely involve some promise that the alleged victim would not testify against Kane or otherwise cooperate with any prosecution, it is not completely impossible for a D.A. to prosecute anyway; difficult, but not unheard-of. The upshot of it all is that District Attorney Sedita’s office mysteriously postponed the first day of grand jury testimony, and it’s scheduled to begin shortly. Reports of a possible settlement are contradictory and likely speculative.

In the meantime, Kane appeared at a bizarre press conference where he apologized for the “distraction” and otherwise generally appreciated – but did not answer – everyone’s questions.

In Sunday’s Buffalo News, however, we have more leaks from people who are likely aligned with Patrick Kane’s legal team, or else are superfans working for law enforcement. The News reports:

DNA evidence does not confirm a woman’s allegations that Patrick Kane raped her, four sources familiar with the case told The Buffalo News.

DNA tests taken from a rape kit conducted on the woman showed no trace of Kane’s DNA was found in the woman’s genital area or on her undergarments.

The lack of that DNA evidence does not necessarily mean a sexual assault did not occur, legal experts say, and the evidence involved in this type of investigation typically consists of more than just DNA. The investigation continues, and Kane has not been charged with any crime.

The only thing missing is a quote from a bar owner about how the alleged victim was asking for it.

Whoever these four sources are, they’re in the tank for Kane. Full stop. This is yet another piece of the elaborate and well-remunerated public relations war being waged against the alleged victim in an effort further to victimize her, shame her, and to try this case in the court of public opinion. Justice is not being served here – only the interests of a very wealthy and famous young man who finds himself in very deep trouble indeed.

But what about this, from a prosecutorial point of view? First, let’s ask a former sex crimes prosecutor who also happens to be a female:

“The absence of DNA and semen, in itself, does not prove that there was no rape,” said Florina Altshiler, a Buffalo attorney who worked as a sex-crimes prosecutor in Alaska. “It proves that there was no ejaculation, or possibly, that the perpetrator wore a condom.”

Altshiler said she is aware of cases in which rapists did wear condoms.

For the counterpoint, let’s ask a male, retired District Attorney:

Frank J. Clark, the county’s former DA, offered a different opinion.

If none of Kane’s DNA was found on the woman’s genital area or in her undergarments, that information “could be a game-changer” in Kane’s favor, he told The News.

“If the vaginal swabs taken at the hospital show no sign of his DNA, that could very well exonerate him of rape,” Clark said.

The occasion of a rapist using a condom is “extremely rare” in his experience. Clark said.

So there you go. Here’s a bombshell piece of leaked information of unknown provenance! What does it mean? MAYBE NOTHING, MAYBE ALL THE THINGS. Feel more informed?

Still, Kane’s DNA was found beneath the woman’s fingernails and on her shoulders, according to two of the sources, one of them a member of law enforcement.

Whatever occurred between the two prompted the woman to abruptly leave Kane’s home, call her brother on a cellphone, go to a local hospital to be examined for signs of rape, and to file a crime report with Hamburg Police, claiming that Kane attacked her, according to authorities and sources close to the case.

I don’t think its a credit – legally speaking – to the News’ four ejacualatory sources that Kane’s DNA isn’t where one might expect it to be, but rape means any unwanted penetration – however slight, so it’s likely that the alleged victim said no, Kane went for it anyway, and she managed to fight her way out of there before Kane finished. After all, Kane’s DNA was found on her, just not around her genitals or in her underwear.

Thanks to the News’ sources, we can now have this discussion: there doesn’t have to be semen for there to have been a rape.

Again: I don’t know whether or not Patrick Kane raped anybody; I certainly hope no one raped anyone. In mid-August, I implored people close to the case to stop talking to the media. As I wrote then, “…the jury pool poisoning is continuing apace — of course, no one has yet been charged with a crime, but it’s safe to say that the authorities are investigating whether one happened, and whom they might charge. So, what we see happening as the coverage lurches from Mark Croce’s victim-shaming to anonymous supporters of the alleged victim defending her, to Lieutenant Thomas English, the aforementioned designated driver turning to the News to rebut the alleged victim’s friends’ assertions.

“The whole case has devolved into a public relations battle. In this case, Kane has deeper pockets, star power, and more to lose, so it stands to reason that his PR effort would be well-funded and professional, while the alleged victim’s side has been silent, and some friends talked to the News without attribution.”

The PR effort calmed down a bit, but Sunday’s article reveals that the court of public opinion is in session, and that maens Kane’s alleged victim is now on trial. Cui bono? Obviously, Kane – casting doubt on the very existence of any “rape” certainly helps his image and bolsters those die-hard fans who refused to believe the allegations because of the identity of the accused. What if the leakers are from the DA’s office? This sort of revelation would, let’s say, soften the blow if charges aren’t filed – regardless of the whether there’s been a civil deal.

Justice isn’t being served here.

Patrick Kane’s Paid Designated Driver Opens Yap

In the Buffalo News, friends of the alleged victim would like you to know that she’s a responsible and trustworthy sort and that she deserves people’s respect and consideration. It seemed a “too little, too late” response to the appalling victim-shaming Kane’s alleged victim received thanks to Mark Croce. (Here, once again, is the Pat Kane FAQ).

We also recently learned some details from the off-duty cop who gave Pat Kane, his male friend, the alleged victim, and her female friend, a ride from Buffalo down to Kane’s house. The cop’s information appears to contradict the alleged victim’s friends’ assertion that she didn’t want to go to Kane’s house, but went to accompany her friend. All of this cross-talk isn’t helping anyone but Kane. Everyone – and I mean everyone – should take a cue from all the lawyers involved in the case and stop talking to the press. This is especially true for the people who have ancillary “information” that bears no reasonable connection to the alleged rape itself. It doesn’t matter who consented to ride to Lakeshore with whom, or for what reason – the News has not spoken with anyone who was in the room with Kane and the woman who was allegedly raped, and that matters because what happened before – at the bar or in the car – isn’t relevant.

The same goes for the alleged victim’s friends who were trying to help. None of them are witnesses as to what happened, yet they’re talking to the media about the alleged victim’s character. I’m sure they thought it might help, but now we have people who are connected to Kane going to the press to contradict that fact. Consider that Buffalo Police Lieutenant Thomas English,

…said he supports Kane, a longtime family friend who has employed him for the past five years.

So a police officer who stands by to drive Kane home when he’s too trashed to drive wants you to know that the alleged victim really wanted to go home with Kane, if you know what he means. Is this real life?

Incidentally, Kane’s buddy whom English also drove that night is Tom Cowan, a co-owner of Rocco Termini’s ridiculously named Dog-E-Style, Doc Sullivan’s, City Tavern, and the space formerly known as Nektar on Elmwood.

“It was a mutual agreement to go hang out at the house,” English said.

So, Kane’s employee says there was consent to hang out. That doesn’t mean that there was consent to have sex.

English, in discussing the Kane matter, was not speaking as a representative of the Police Department. Officers are prohibited from speaking to reporters in official capacity.

Croce said he spoke last week with a District Attorney’s Office investigator and told his general manager to fully cooperate with the authorities in providing a list of bartenders and their contact information.

So, here’s a question – what’s on Kane’s bar tab from that night? Croce went out of his way to tell the News that Kane only had a couple of drinks and a couple of shots in an effort to establish that he wasn’t visibly drunk. Go get that information. After all, that bar tab is impartial and has no motive to support or attack anyone.

If you want to read something responsible about the Kane case in the Buffalo News – something that isn’t based on irrelevant observations, hearsay, irrelevant extraneous information, and information about the alleged victim’s character – in other words, if you want to read something that doesn’t pre-emptively poison the jury pool and attempt to try the case in the really unreliable court of public opinion, then read this “Another Voice” by Jessica Pirro from Crisis Services, and this commentary by Amy Moritz on rape culture.

The accused athletes are not unfailing heroes. They’re not your “brah” even if he did once buy you a shot. Nor do all athletes abuse their protected cocoon of athletic privilege.

So let’s step away from our corners and our fierce loyalties and take a beat.

Let’s move beyond playing the ill-informed “he-said-she-said” game and really examine the ways in which our sports culture perpetuates rape culture.

Everyone who thinks they observed something needs to shut up, and the good-hearted people who are trying to bolster the alleged victim’s character aren’t necessarily helping, either. “No comment” works, and talk only to the cops – not to the press.

1 2 3 11